list_requests

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses pagination and sorting capabilities, but lacks explicit safety disclosure (read-only nature), error behavior, or what the return payload contains. 'List' implies read-only but doesn't confirm no side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single, efficient sentence with verb-fronted structure ('List all...'). Every clause serves a purpose. Minor quibble: 'all' combined with pagination parameters could confuse, but generally very tight.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Adequate for a 5-parameter list operation with good schema coverage, but gaps remain due to missing annotations and output schema. No description of return structure, rate limits, or empty result behavior. Minimum viable for this complexity level.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline applies. The description adds value by functionally grouping parameters into 'status filtering,' 'pagination,' and 'sorting,' which helps the agent understand the parameter purposes beyond the individual schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Excellent specificity: 'List' (verb) + 'short creation requests' (resource) clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'get_shorts' (returns completed shorts) and 'list_game_videos'/'list_music' (different resource types). The scope is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. While the resource type 'short creation requests' implies this is for job monitoring/tracking versus creating content (create_short) or retrieving finished products (get_shorts), it doesn't state this explicitly or mention prerequisites like auth requirements.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.